I am not reading back through 178 pages, but I am fairly positive that the team declared this thread OFF-LIMITS to debate. It stops now please. This thread has been left here as a resource for those who choose to use it. If not, please ignore it.

Can I respectfully ask why that this thread in particular is not allowed to have any debate when I have never seen any other thread that was to remain purely one sided about any topic? I am not trying to be rude, but I honestly do not understand.

I would also like to point out (again) that I am not pro circ, and am not telling anyone they should circumcise. I am not trying to tell people what to do, I just think it's fair that there are two sides presented.

It would also seem more tolerable if incorrect information was not found here, such as the scripture referenced in the op. But even then I still don't understand not allowing respectful discussion about a topic on a discussion board.

Also, if it is to remain an untouchable thread, can't we just sticky it and be done with it? Or perhaps add it to the sticky in parenting? I'm still not trying to be rude or argue with the mod, honest question.

Also, if it is to remain an untouchable thread, can't we just sticky it and be done with it? Or perhaps add it to the sticky in parenting? I'm still not trying to be rude or argue with the mod, honest question.

it is not meant to be untouchable, just not debated. You are welcome to start another thread politely sharing the other side of things if you'd like.

Also, if it is to remain an untouchable thread, can't we just sticky it and be done with it? Or perhaps add it to the sticky in parenting? I'm still not trying to be rude or argue with the mod, honest question.

Its not.

Its not to be debated. The previous poster only bumped it up with a smiley as previously asked and you immediatly start in with debate.

The thread is about NOT circing. Please keep it on the topic of NOT circing.

I just want to thank those who have posted information here. I think that the information about why circumcision is not done is actually not widely advertised in the medical community, and it's threads like this that allow people to find the information about what is done & how it affects the infant. Yes, some of this is decidely opinionated (such as looking at the issue as purely cosmetic versus potentially prophylactic; how someone looks at that particular issue is their decision), but a lot of it is purely informational (such as circumcision removes healthy tissue packed with nerves). Whether you take that purely informational part of the posts as pro or anti is your decision/opinion. I think a lot of people look at the part that points out that foreskins rarely become diseased, penile cancer is usually related to STDs (a condom is more prevention than a circumcision here), and that circumcision is done with little to no anesthesia during and usually no pain relief after and see it as purely anticircumcision, but really, it's just information that you can then choose how you proceed from there.

It's just like when a surgeon explains that there are risks of bleeding, permanent nerve/muscle/organ injury, infection, etc. with a particular procedure, and some people decide it's not worth the risk and some decide that it is. I hope I'm not getting into debate territory here, and I agree that this particular thread was intended for information on one side of the topic. Any other topic would have the same courtesy extended if that intent was clearly stated and not written in a flaming/attack way. I haven't been here that long, but it seems to me that the threads that get closed are ones that get into arguments and start becoming nasty rather than the original intent.

We have to give a persuasive speech in class. Abolishing RIC is my topic. I'm really looking forward to this but they want 6 sources found from the school's reference database grrr. Hopefully I find some useful information. I can get other sources thankfully. Out of all the people in class that have male children all of them circed and will again according to mt survey. Not shocking. There was a couple no they would not and a few neutrals.

Ahahaha. Awesome. Of course I had this fight with a friend. "Female genital mutilation is TOTALLY different!!!" Uhh, why? There are many forms of FGM, some extreme and some dealing only with the labia, but they all damage and/or remove healthy tissue, and the reasons for FGM are based on culture instead of medical evidence. So exactly how is that different than circumcision?